Michael John Shott-Hugo Wolf's Music Criticisms: Trans- lation and Analysis According to Pepper's Four World Hypotheses Ann Arbor: University Microfilms (UM order no. 64-12,087, 1964. 655 pp., Indiana University diss.) John Morgan Between 1884 and 1887 the attention of Viennese musical circles was drawn to the previously unknown name of Hugo Wolf. This was not because, as Wolf had hoped, he had caught their interest and enthusiasm with the brilliance of his own creative achievements in music. (As a matter of fact, Wolf had at this point in his career composed scarcely anything even sug- gesting the mastery that he was to attain within a very few years.) Rather, it was as music critic for one of the city's most widely-read magazines of fashion that the young composer made his debut. His position as a contribu- tor to the Wiener Salonblatt was secured through his friends, the K6cherts, who, as court jewelers, were important advertisers in the periodical. They were consequently able to wield their influence in Wolf's behalf upon the journal's publisher, Moritz Engel.1 The position as music critic may not have fulfilled Wolf's ambitions with regard to his introduction to Viennese musical society, but it at least provided him with regular employment for three years and released him from financial dependence upon his family. More importantly, it insured that nearly every Sunday his name would lie before the eyes of the city's elite and fashionable. The products of Wolf's journalistic activities were gathered into book form over half a century ago by two of the composer's friends, Richard Batka and Heinrich Werner.2 For his 1964 Indiana University dissertation, Michael John Shott prepared an English translation of the 378-page Batka-Werner edition, complete with Werner's preface. While the translation accounts for the bulk of Shott's project, a brief section of commentary concludes his study. Because copies of the Batka-Werner original are difficult to 10cate,3 and since few institutions are likely to own appropriate numbers ofthe Salonblatt- which was, after all, little more than a fashion sheet-Shott's dissertation takes on major importance as a readily available source for Wolf's significant essays. It is therefore most unfortunate that the translation as Shott leaves it is adequate neither for publication nor for continued scholarly use. Objec- tions to Shott's completed translation are of two kinds: errors of judgment and policy in the mechanical process of converting Wolf's ideas from Ger- man into English, and failure to provide the translation with the critical apparatus necessary for utilizing it as a research tool. The translation itselffollows Wolf's text closely and accurately enough, but 101 herein lies the first stumbling block. Shott's English is so bound to the Ger- man original that it is often clumsy and unidiomatic. This is particularly regrettable since Wolf's German is literary, polished, and elegant; certainly any English translation must approach a similar level in order to achieve permanent acceptability, even at the expense of a literal word-for-word rendering. Take, for example, this extract from a remarkable passage in a review (23 March 1884) inspired by Brahms's String Quintet in F Major, Op. 88. Shott's translation4 is here juxtaposed against the German origina1.5 Die Phantasie des Komponisten The imagination of the composer schwelgt nur in pittoresken Bil- abounds in picturesque images; dern; die frostigen Novembernebel, the frosty fogs of November, die sonst tiber seine Kompositionen which usually lie over his compo- sich lagern undjedem warmen Her- sitions and take the breath away zenslaut, noch ehe er erklingen from every warm sound coming kann, den Atem benehmen,-hier from the heart even before it can entdecken wir keine Spur davon: be heard,-here we detect no trace alles ist sonnig, bald heller, of all this; everything is sunny, bald dammriger; ein zauberhaftes now brighter, now duskier, a magi- Smaragdgrtin gieBt sich tiber dieses cal emerald green is poured over marchenhafte Frtihlingsbild aus. this fairy tale picture of spring. All Alles grtint und knospet. Ja man is green and budding. Yes, one h6rt formlich das Gras wachs en- can practically hear the grass die Natur so geheimnisvoll, so grow-nature so mysterious, so feierlich still, so selig verklart, solemnly peaceful, so blissfully -der Komponist konnte sich radiant,-the composer had to nur mit Gewalt durch raschen Ent- drag himself away from this magic schluB dies em Zauber entziehen, so only through forcing a quick re- sehr hielt ihn die Muse im Banne. solution, so securely did the muse 1m zweiten Satze senken sich hold him in bondage. In the se- die Schatten tiefer herunter. Der cond movement the shadows sink Abend und allmahlich die Nacht lower. The evening and gradually htillen die phantastischen Gebilde the night envelop the fantastic des wunderlichen Lebens aus dem configurations of the strange life ersten Satze ein. Tiefes Sinnen of the first movement. Deep medi- und Schweigen. Ein lebhaft be- tation and silence. A sprightly, wegtes anmutiges Bild durchschwirrt animated, graceful image whirls die tiefe Einsamkeit. Es ist, als through the deep loneliness. It ob Gltihwtirmer ihren Reigen tanz- is like fireflies doing a round ten, so blitzt und funkelt es in den dance, flashing and sparkling in hastigen Figuren der Instrumente. the hurried passages of the instru- Aber das Bild verschwindet. Die ments. But the image disappears. vorige Stille tritt ein, urn jedoch The earlier silence comes back, to wiederum durch ein ahnliches Motiv be interrupted again by a similar unterbrochen zu werden. In selt- motif. In strange harmonies which samen Harmonien, die wie zwischen modulate between dreams and Traum und Wachen modulieren, waking, this mysterious tone verhallt dieses mysteri6ses Tonge- picture dies away. malde. 102 Frank Walker, in the chapter of his biography dealing with Wolf's criti- cism, translates the same passage as follows:6 The imagination of the composer revels in picturesque images; we find no trace of the frosty November mists that elsewhere brood over his compositions and stifle each warm tone from the heart before it can sound out-all is sunny, now brighter, now more dim; a magical emerald green is diffused over this fairy-like picture of spring; every- thing grows green and buds, one really hears the grass growing- nature is so mysterious, so solemnly still, so blissfully transfigured- the composer could only by a sudden effort of will withdraw himself from this magic, so closely did the muse hold him under her spell. In the second movement the shadows sink lower. Evening, and then night, shroud the fantaslic creations that moved so wonderfully in the first movement. Deep meditation and silence. An animated form moves through the deep solitude. It is as if glow-worms danced their rounds, it flashes and sparkles so in the rushing figures of the instruments. But the form disappears. The former silence returns, to be once again broken by a similar motive. In strange harmonies, that modulate between dream and waking, this mysterious tone-picture dies away. Certainly Walker's translation conveys the sense of Wolf's remarks as well as Shott's, but it reads in English with a polish that reflects the quality of style found in Wolf's German-a quality that inspired Walker to apply the term "prose poem" to some of the composer's best writing. A strong sense of poetry also graces Ernest Newman's somewhat freer rendering of selections from the same review.7 Beyond this general criticism of Shott's manner of converting German into English, there are particular problems in the translation that betray Shott's provincialism in approaching 19th-century music. For example, Wolf sometimes refers to the titles of individual works in the original language, sometimes in the German equivalent. This is a common and perfectly na- tural outgrowth of the fact that music, particularly in the operatic sphere, has always been somewhat multilingual in Germany. Since, however, in modern English most operas are referred to either by their original titles or by some commonly-recognized English translation, one title should be employed consistently. II Trovatore, for example, should not appear as Troubadour (pp. 6, 56)8; L' Enfance du Christ is known better by that title than by The Childhood of the Lord (p. 473). Guillaume Tell is probably more familiar as William Tell, but in any event should not be called Guglielmo Tell (p. 52). Auber's La Muette de Portici is best known by that title or by its subtitle, Masaniello; few readers would know the work as Mute Woman of Portici (p. 9). Sometimes Shott's use of titles suggests that he is unsure about the country of origin. There can be no excuse, however, for the appearance of titles like Robert der Teufel (p. 81), Die Afrikanerin (p. 81), Die Jiidin (p. 91), or fo r the consistent misspellings Symphonie phantastique and The Hugenots. Shott's failure to provide his text with a critical apparatus points the way 103 to another project that must be undertaken before Wolf's CritiCisms can appear in a satisfactory edition. In the first place, the Batka-Werner edition, while complete in most respects, does contain certain clearly indicated de- letions. These could be restored by reference to the Salonblatt itself. Complete information about the programs reviewed by Wolf should also be provided in critical notes, including the date and place of each performance, a list of performers, and the title of each work presented. For example, Wolf may refer to a "Brahms symphony," without any further indication; more thorough documentation would eliminate such obscurities and allow more immediate access to Wolf's observations. Shott's "analysis" section explores questions that appear, to this reviewer at least, of dubious value. The author sets himself (p. 541) the task of testing the "validity" of Wolf's criticisms. After a labored discussion of what validity is, why it is important, and then a capsule biography of Wolf, we read the following, which is the cornerstone of justification for the edifice that Shott is about to construct (pp. 554-55) : Although Wolf was certain that the styles of Berlioz, Wagner, and Liszt were going to constitute the foundation for the future, subsequent history has proved him mistaken. Had he lived for another twenty years, he would have become a witness to a marked reaction against the romanticism in which he believed so strongly. Today Brahms is con- sidered a great composer, and the opinions of Wolf's adversaries seem to have been vindicated, while the works of Wagner and Liszt no longer enjoy the esteem accorded to them by Wolf and his supporters. Having assumed that history has settled the supposed Brahms-"Wagner controversy once and for all and has thereby rendered \Volf's criticisms "invalid" in one sense, Shott sets out to test "whether Wolf's judgments of compositions and performances are based upon standards that may be con- sidered valid in the light of acceptable aesthetic criteria of the present day" (p. 559). Before this test can be made, however, Shott screens vVolf's reviews to arrive at a core of material that meets the requirements of being at least 125 words in length, exclusively devoted to clear opinions about a composi- tion or performance (rather than description), and characterized by ob- jectivity rather than subjective bias. Shott is thus left with about eighty pages of Wolf's writing-less than twenty per cent of all the criticisms published in the Salonblatt. At this point there follows a chapter surveying Shott's search for "acceptable aesthetic criteria" against which to weigh the reduced body of criticism (pp. 576-87). The choice falls upon the system first expounded by Stephen C. Pepper in World If;potheses9 and amplified in his The Basis of Criticism in the Arts.1° In a chapter summarizing Pepper's ideas Shott describes each of the four hypotheses and then concludes (p. 599) : The critic, then, must ask the following separate questions about a work of art: (1) How pleasant are the feelings it arouses? (2) How vivid an experience does it provide? (3) How well integrated is it? (4) How satisfying is it to a normal person? lO4 All this is by way of preparation for a very brief (twelve-page) section of analysis, in which Shott demonstrates that Wolf never seems to have applied Pepper's "mechanist" standard (number 1 above) to a musical work, and that his criteria are valid primarily by "formist" standards (number 4 above). Even if one is willing to accept the premise of Shott's approach, one cannot help but feel that he has drawn back from reaching the inevitable conclusion of his own researches: that Wolf's criticisms are, by Pepper's standards, invalid. On page 598 we learn that Pepper's method demands the simul- taneous involvement of all four viewpoints represented by the world hypo- theses: The only requirement that must be fulfilled to arrive at a valid judgment is that all of these four world hypotheses are to be consulted. The per- ceiver of a work of art can and often does reflect only one. However, if the critic disregards the ideas of even one of the four, it would prevent him from arriving at a fair judgment, because the data would not be comprehensive, as we are using the term. Since, according to Shott's findings, Wolf never expressed in his written reviews a single attitude that reflected the composite of all four world hypo- theses, one must conclude that his essays are, in these terms, invalid. Shott's failure to draw this conclusion would seem to indicate that he is as unconfi- dent in the approach he has taken as we are.ll Certainly, an examination of the circumstances surrounding Wolf's assumption of his post with the Salonblatt, as well as a consideration of the audience for which the reviews were intended, suggests that the application of such abstract, ideal criteria as those advanced by Shott is extremely unfair. Wolf aimed to set down what he considered the faults of musical society in the Vienna of his day; but he was not prepared to do so in the systematic, analytical way demanded by Pepper's methods, nor would such an approach have interested or satisfied his readers. The story12 that Wolf rejected the idea of publishing his criticisms in book form because they were poorly written has baffled biographers, since, as reviews, they are extremely well written. In fact, Wolf's attitude may have arisen from an unwillingness to present his ideas in the impassioned Salonblatt style before a more discerning public. The delectable treat Wolf whipped up to please Vienna's dilettantes would not, he knew, satisfy the more substantial and circumspect tastes of the Musikus. Beyond this, the question of "validity" in Wolf's criticisms is, for the historian, quite beside the point. Because Wolf ranks as an important figure in the development of new music in the later 19th century and because his criticisms reflect his tastes and preferences in colorful and meaningful prose, they have already earned a validity of their own and are more interesting when studied as historical documents than as mere records of opinion. From this standpoint the Musikalische Kritiken are a musicologist's treasure-trove. Surely, for example, Wolf's thoughts with regard to the symphonic poem 105 recorded here are of major significance in casting some light on his own important essay in the genre, Penthesilea, with which he was occupied while writing for the Salonblatt. Wolf's observations on songs and song-writing are few and far between in the criticism; yet he discusses the qualities he found admirable and damnable in most of the famous singers of his time. Not only do these comments illustrate the composer's ideas about what constitutes good musicianship and good drama, but they are also a guideline to what he expected-no, counted upon-for effective delivery of his own songs. Furthermore, many of the artists reviewed by W olflived long enough to make recordings. Gustav Walter, for example, who seems to have been among the first well-known singers in Vienna to abandon opera for the recital hall, always received Wolf's warm approval. Walter's voice was, from Wolf's comments, already in decline in the 1880's, and by the time he cut records early in 1904 there was little left of its former glory. But the sensitivity to poetry, the vividness of interpretation combined with smooth vocal tech- nique that fired Wolf's imagination twenty years before, may still be heard by students of the Lieder-singer's art. Nor is it difficult to discern from Lilli Leh- mann's recordings the virago side of her delivery that sometimes offended Wolf and inspired his poetic vision of the soul of Isolde.13 Similarly, Wolf's comments on operatic composition and production, performance at the piano, and the art of ensemble playing take on particular significance and interest when considered in conjunction with the products of Wolf's own career as a composer. In other words, Wolf's criticisms, like those of other composer-critics, are most valuable when they reflect upon his own musical ideas and feelings; no analysis can be considered satisfactory if it fails to deal with this aspect of their importance as historical documents. Shott's avoidance of these matters for what seems, by comparison, an intellectual goose-chase seriously under- mines the musicological significance of his project and leaves much to be considered in some future study of Wolf's essays. NOTES 1 Frank Walker, Hugo Wolf: A Biography (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1968), p. 147. 2 Hugo Wolfs musikalische Kritiken (Leipzig: Breitkopf & Hartel, 1911). 3 On p. viii of his dissertation Shott lists the six libraries he knew to hold copies in 1964. 4 Shott, p. 45. o Batka-Werner, p. 31. 6 Walker, pp. 157-58. 7 Hugo Wolf (New York: Dover Publications, Inc., 1966), pp. 37-38. 8 All page numbers in the text refer to Shott's dissertation. 9 Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1961. 10 Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1963. 11 Shott, in fact, appears to lay the groundwork for this conclusion on p. 607. But he ultimately backs down from the harsher verdict, allowing in his final summary that Wolf's criticisms are "valid according to formist standards" (p. 621). 12 Related by Walker, pp. 161-62. 13 Review for 25 January 1885; Batka-Werner, pp. 137-38. 106